Aman Kumar @ Guddu @ Mirtyunjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47891 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2021 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Guddu @ Mirtyunjay Kumar S/o Rampukar Paswan R/o Village - Noudega, P.S. Baheri, District - Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of start of normal functioning of the physical court.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila (Baheri) P.S. Case No. 44 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 504 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution case, the marriage of the informant was solemnized with Sandip paswan about 7 years ago and she has one male and one female child. Her husband solemnized second marriage with another lady, so she returned back to her father's house. It is further alleged that one Aman Kumar @ Laddu has visiting term in the house of informant's parent. When informant's parent were outside the house, accused Aman Kumar @ Laddu entered into her house and committed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47891 of 2021(3) dt.23-03-2022 2/2 raper after putting knife upon her. When the informant started weeping then he threatened her if she will told to anyone, he would kill her children. It is further alleged that accused Aman Kumar @ Laddu again committed raper with her on promise to solemnize marriage with her. When informant became pregnant and put pressure upon the accused petitioner to solemnize marriage with her, but he evaded.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and has committed no offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is in custody since 28.04.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on the basis of material available on the record and the case diary submits that the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. supported the allegation as well as in the F.I.R. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the same stands rejected.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T